http://auto.howstuffworks.com/bugatti.htm - must read, awesome machine.. has a cool million dollar (USD) price tag though.

48 valve, quad turbo W16 (Think Two v8's side by side).. drool.

Veyron specs have been out since 2001.

Its powerful, its fast, its expensive.

But god damn I find this car so uninteresting. And not just cos its not a fulli sik turbo.

You just cant relate to it. I cant picture myself (or anyone else other than some fat rich prick™) driving one of these down the street to get some groceries, or even taking it around the local track.

It just a show-pony when you get down to it.

It goes fast but I reckon it's one of the most ugly cars ever.

Spectacularly ugly.

Yeah I saw this on slashdot today as well. It certainly is an engineering feat. IIRC Michael Schumacher (sp) ordered one of these babies, god knows he can affort it and has the skills to drive it ;)

old, ugly and expensive

it would be fun to drive tho

yeah man, all i want is the engine.

i wouldn't mind seein go down the quarter

last edited by linkin at 16:06:54 28/Apr/04

I wouldn't go as far as saying its ugly, but if definitely has the bugatti front grill which does look a but gumby.

But could you imagine how much fuel it would go through?

I think the very first bugatti's were more groundbreaking. We are talking 4 valve per cylinder technology in 1916 or something. Their biggest problems were in handling, summed up well by senior bugatti: "I make my cars to go, no to stop!". In 1926 he built a 12.7 litre engine with 300hp.

wat a s***box

Give me the cadillac 16 anyday of the veyron.


http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/models/gallery.jsp?model=sixteen

"The all-aluminum 13.6-liter (830 cu in), 32-valve, 16-cylinder XV16 engine features:"

It actually does not perform that well.

I saw it on a car show, 911 Turbo beats it easily.

16 cyclinder would sound alright though.

heh... i can find a bike for 20k that goes faster...

also if you have to think about fuel costs you cant afford it

ME FOUR-TWELVE. CAn't remember all details but 850HP, better stats in recent testing than the good ol McLaren F1. Check out these pics: http://www.fast-autos.net/chrysler/chryslerme412.html

Also for fun: http://www.roadsage.com/images/autos/cadillac.jpg

http://www.freenet.de/freenet/auto_und_verkehr/specials/bildershows/dodge_tomahawk/bilder_gross/02.jpeg

That "automobile" puts out 1000 brake horses infront of the flywheel.
For a 16 cylinder, quad turbo, that isn't much.

You're paying a million bucks because it's a Bugatti.

It just a show-pony when you get down to it.

and hotted up ricers with gay spoilers and addon tacos aren't?

just another showpony then :p

eitherway, I'd sure as f*** take one...probably not before a Ferrari Marenello though, i think they're sexy ++

That "automobile" puts out 1000 brake horses infront of the flywheel.

brake horsepower is at the wheels. not at the flywheel.

i'd love to have that car. but i wonder how much torque she turns..
however even if i had the money i dont think i'd but that.
much rather maclaren F1 or ferriari of somekind.

still awesum car tho

last edited by Fuknukle at 20:53:04 28/Apr/04

i bet my skyline could beat it

You're paying a million bucks because it's a Bugatti.

Actually, isn't it made by VW?

brake horsepower is at the wheels. not at the flywheel.

Incorrect.

Brake horsepower is power measured at the crankshaft (output shaft). The name "brake horsepower" has nothing to do with the brakes on the vehicle, but rather the absorption dynamometer (otherwise known as a "brake") which is used to measure the power.

I feel informed. Thanks. :P

yes, bugatti's are now made (or at least, this one is being made) by VW.

VW is a gigantic company though, not just VW, i think they own Audi and several other big companies.

I found the technology behind the car to be far more interesting than the car. I wish they went into more depth .

I saw it on a car show, 911 Turbo beats it easily.

So VW spent all this money on the Bugatti only to have it beaten "easily" by their porsche 911? I never heard of any porsche going much faster than 300, and I doubt any porsche could accelerate like this beast, 30+ cm tires and AWD? damn.

What you probably meant to say was the porsche handled better. Well la dee da.

never been a fan of their front grille, never been a fan of anyone's fancy ass grille, I like plain & simple looks. Like someone (maxe maybe) said, can't see anyone just taking it out to get the weekly shopping, more like some rich guy's toy to play with on the autobahn (nice big highway with no speed limit at all for those who don't know).

yeah not the greatest looking car but they had to keep the aerodynamics in mind when designing it which wouldn't have helped

still be a blast to drive

I think the damn thing looks ugly. I'd rather fork out for the Maclaren F1, Koenigsegg or a Pagani Zonda. At least they look sexy.

last edited by sKryBe at 17:09:38 29/Apr/04

It cant handle for s*** either. They took it for its first test drive not long ago around a super car rink and it spun out on its first turn and almost hit the wall. Its dodgy and ugly.

(macca)

you're dodgy and ugly macca.

haha and you would know wouldnt you...

i would prefer the Chrysler me-412 ,looks just a Tad better and i loke the fact of just one v12 instead of 2 v8's



(mopar or no car)

It just a show-pony when you get down to it.

and hotted up ricers with gay spoilers and addon tacos aren't?

no, theyre just s***.

also, rofl taco joke

last edited by maxe at 15:04:13 29/Apr/04

How long does this beast take to hit 100 clicks? Can't be all that fast if they don't mention it.

3 seconds nf its on the site

A zero-to-60 time of three seconds

its in mph, equiv to 100km/h

Incorrect.

Brake horsepower is power measured at the crankshaft (output shaft). The name "brake horsepower" has nothing to do with the brakes on the vehicle, but rather the absorption dynamometer (otherwise known as a "brake") which is used to measure the power.

ahh my bad. thx for that. i apreciate the correction :D

3 seconds nf its on the site


A zero-to-60 time of three seconds



its in mph, equiv to 100km/h

Woah, f***.. I didn't realise it was in MPH, that's insane!

Jeeeeeeeeesus.